links for 2008-01-09

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • Hi Bob,

    I’d like to mention that just because the University of Wisconsin failed to complete their payroll project, it doesn’t necessarily say something about the software :-)

    Keep up the good weblog,
    Bart

  • You have a good point. In fact, the final post-mortem report blamed much on the poor project management. Had the project management not been so horrible the issues of software problems probably would have been more evident. As someone who was involved, both Lawson and their bedfellow IBM left a really poor (and lasting) impression on many people. Being interested in profits is fine, but nobody wants to be taken advantage of, especially by two vendors working in tandem.

    Regardless, I stand by my statement that you cannot conclude anything about the back end of things by looking solely at the front end. Lawson happened to be the example here, and while I have strong feelings regarding them it stands for any software product.

  • Top Gear is great, “Meet Billy Bob. He thinks Deliverance is a documentary.”

  • Hey Bart,
    I’ve worked with Lawson for over 9 years and I can tell you, without a doubt, that it is the biggest piece of garbage I’ve every worked with in my life. Project Management? When the product absolutely sucks, its hard to manage. I finally had enough with Lawson and started working with Microsoft Dynamics (GP, SL, AX, NAV). Those are real products that actually work well, tight code, and good architecture. Lawson is a piece of crap put together with scotch tape and rubber bands. Do they still have to use MKS to emulate a UNIX shell? Geez….gimme a break !!!

Previous Post:

Next Post:

%d bloggers like this: